STUDENT/TEACHER INTRODUCTION & DEBATE ACTIVITIES

Transcription

1 Portfolio Assessments developed by Rob Alvarez, LHS August, 2007 STUDENT/TEACHER INTRODUCTION & DEBATE ACTIVITIES COLLIER COUNTY SCHOOLS PERFORMANCE-BASED PORTFOLIO ASSESSMENT 1

2 Student Congress Student Introduction Student Congress is an entry-level debate event. In this event students compete for speaker points and nominations for best speaker of chamber. Student Congress is a parliamentary style debate that is tied to Robert s Rules of Order. Senators run a chamber much like our own Senate. Students are given opportunity to give speeches and debate topics of merit that shadow current government policy. To receive highest possible score, while performing an authorship speech students must consider points presented in chapter 29 of Mastering Competitive Debate, Seventh Edition, Student Edition, pages Each speech is scored based on several factors. These include both content and delivery. Content factors are knowledge of topic, reasoning, ability to respond to previous speakers arguments, contribution of new perspectives on debate, knowledge of parliamentary procedures, and overall persuasiveness. Mastering Competitive Debate, 234 Student Congress Resources Please find some student created sample topics for Student Congress: A Resolution to Reinstate Military Draft A Resolution to Raise Automobile Driving Age from 16 to 18 A Resolution to Reform Social Security Please reference pages (11-17) at following link to find a sample resolution and guidelines for participating in student congress. Please use following matrix to frame your authorship speech and response speech. Legislation Title/Topic: Two Facts about topic of legislation: 1.) 2.) Two Quotes about topic: (list author... try to make it someone we ve heard of.) 1.) 2.) Three main points with examples: 1.) 2.) 2

3 3.) Conclusion that restates your position and implores your chamber to vote in affirmation of your resolution: 3

4 Student Congress Grader Introduction Student Congress is a competitive debate event. In this event, competitors are selected by a Presiding Officer to deliver three-minute authorship speeches to a chamber of Senators. It is important for Senators to use all of ir allotted time without going over. Senators should open ir speech with an attention step that captivates audience. Use movement on transitions. Include current, reputable citations to back statements and use vocal variety to facilitate ir argument. Please use this 6-point rubric to evaluate three-minute authorship speech. The overall score (1-6) should reflect an average of two scores in categories. Please use whole numbers only. Category Quality of argumentation Delivery and style major point was well with several relevant facts, statistics and or examples Senator consistently in a way that kept chamber major adequately with relevant facts, statistics and/or examples Senator usually eye contact, voice and a in a way that kept attention of chamber major with facts, statistics and or examples, but relevance of some was Senator sometimes gestures, in a way that kept chamber Some points were with facts and statistics of relevance Senator few and made little eye contact with chamber Lack of support and/or examples provided Senator rarely made eye contact with chamber Points were not Senator s lacked any of elements to gain chamber. 4

5 Public Forum Student Introduction Public Forum Debate is a team event where one team supports and or team rejects a position presented in a resolution. Public Forum topics change every two months. The clash of ideas must be communicated in a manner persuasive to non-specialist judge. The debate should: -display solid logic, reasoning, and analysis -utilize evidence but not be driven by it -present a clash of ideas -counter arguments of (rebuttal) -communicate ideas with clarity, organization, eloquence, and professional decorum To receive highest possible score, while participating in a Public Forum Debate students must consider points presented in chapter 31 of Mastering Competitive Debate, Seventh Edition, Student Edition, pages Public Forum Debate Resources: Please find some Public Forum debate topics that were this year: Resolved: That private ownership of handguns should be banned in United States Resolved: United States corporations should honor all prior commitments to employee pensions Resolved: That lobbyists negatively influence legislative process in United States A wonderful matrix for creating and participating in Public Forum can be found at following link: Pages (11-12). 5

6 Public Forum Grader Introduction Public Forum Debate is a team event that advocates or rejects a position posed by resolution. A central tenet of debate is that clash of ideas must be communicated in a manner persuasive to non-specialist or citizen judge. Public Forum values persuasion as much as it values argumentation and reasoning. Unlike Policy Debate, evidence in Public Forum may be less formal, more anecdotal forms of evidence like CNN or newspaper reports. Judges should expect to see clash, meaning debaters refute ir arguments, showing why y are flawed or insufficient. Delivery is an important part of this event. Rate of speech should be at a conversational pace. Good speaking in this event will approximate good speaking in front of community groups. Debaters should be fluent, articulate, free of slang and jargon, have good vocal variety and good eye contact with judge. Please use this 6-point rubric to evaluate each competitor in round. The overall score (1-6) should reflect an average of two scores in categories. Please use whole numbers only. Category Quality of argumentation Delivery and style major well with logic, ory and consistently voice and a that kept and judge major adequately ory and usually that kept major ory and or but relevance of some was sometimes gestures, that kept Some points were with logic and ory of relevance few and made little eye contact with Lack of support was provided rarely made eye contact and or gestured with Points were not s lacked nonverbal reinforcement 6

7 Lincoln Douglas Student Introduction Lincoln Douglas Debate is a value-based debate. L/D is a one on one debate where one side upholds proposition and or side opposes it. An example of a value proposition is, Resolved: On balance, violent revolution is a just response to political oppression. L/D topic change monthly. The best way to develop your case is to use traditional 5-paragraph essay format that includes an introduction, three main points and a strong conclusion. Key points to include and consider are: Value- examples, justice, liberty, freedom Definitions- define scope of debate and are agreed upon Criterion- a statement or a concept that supports your value premise Contentions- are your examples that support you criterion To receive highest possible score, while participating in a Lincoln Douglas Debate students must consider points presented in chapter 29 of Mastering Competitive Debate, Seventh Edition, Student Edition, pages Lincoln Douglas Resources: Resolutions in L-D debate are usually stated as propositions of value. Although propositions are sometimes related to issues of policy, this is not always case. Typical resolutions include: The spirit of law ought to take precedence over letter of law to enhance justice Cooperation is superior to competition Violent revolution is a just response to oppression A great resource for students that illustrates a sample Affirmative case on Eminent Domain and Negative case on Military Intelligence can be found at following link: 7

8 Lincoln Douglas Grader Introduction Lincoln-Douglas debate is a two-person format debate where affirmative supports resolution and negative attacks it. Please apply following rubric to each speaker. The resolution, which changes every two months, is always a question of value. The debaters will try to show why ir position supports more important, fundamental principles inherent in ir position and why that position is superior to opponent s position. Each debater will present a case that includes: 1. Value: A universally held principle that debater advocates in order to affirm or negate resolution. Example: justice 2. Criterion: The standard by which debater achieves value that he/she presents. It is a measuring stick. Example: How is value of justice achieved? By ensuring equality before law. 3. Definitions: These may be given by affirmative to clarify terms in resolution that are ambiguous. Not every word in resolution must be defined. Sometimes negative will offer a counter-definition because y disagree with affirmative s interpretation. 4. Arguments: Also called contentions/areas of analysis/justifications/levels of argumentation, se are reasons debater gives in support of position presented. The debaters will construct ir cases using logic, ory, and. Arguments are to be substantiated by analysis, testimony, comparison and contrast, analogy, example, and/or factual data. Neir debater is responsible for providing a plan to solve for problem(s) identified with resolution. In this event, debaters take different approaches to delivery. The most important requirement for a debater s delivery is that you are able to understand m and write down ir arguments. You are not expected to consider arguments that are presented at such a rapid pace that you cannot understand m. Ultimately, a balance between relevant content and persuasive delivery is optimal. Please use this 6-point rubric to evaluate each competitor in round. The overall score (1-6) should reflect an average of two scores in categories. Please use whole numbers only. Category Quality of argumentation Delivery and style major point was well ory and consistently major adequately ory and usually eye contact, voice and a major ory and or but relevance of some was sometimes gestures, Some points were with logic and ory of relevance few and made little eye contact Lack of support was provided rarely made eye contact and or gestures Points were not s lacked nonverbal reinforcement 8

9 Policy Debate Student Introduction Policy Debate is a timed two on two-team debate where arguments are created in affirmation or negation of a predetermined resolution. At end of debate an experienced judge determines which side debated most effectively. An example of a policy debate topic is; The death penalty should be abolished in America. Policy Debate is a research-intensive activity that requires many weeks of preparation. Policy Debate teams debate same topic for entire debate season. To receive highest possible score while participating in a Policy Debate, students must consider points presented in chapters 1-25 of Mastering Competitive Debate, Seventh Edition, Student Edition, pages Policy Debate Resources: Past resolutions in Policy Debate are: Resolved: That United States federal government should establish an ocean policy substantially increasing protection of marine natural resources Resolved: That United States federal government should establish a foreign policy substantially increasing its support of United Nations peacekeeping operations Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially decrease its authority eir to detain without charge or to search without probable cause Resolved: The United States federal government should establish a policy substantially increasing number of persons serving in one or more of following national service programs: AmericCorps, Citizen Corps, Senior Corps, Peace Corps, Learn and Serve American, Armed Forces. If you are interested in learning most you can about Policy Debate, you should consider attending any of a number of debate camps offered over summer. The benefits of camps are numerous, from case writing to prepackaged evidence for upcoming year. The following links reference some camps that are offered over 2007-summer break. Please also find online resources geared toward policy debate: 9

10 Policy Debate Grader Introduction Policy Debate is also called Team Debate or Cross Examination Debate. It is two teams of two debaters where affirmative supports resolution and negative attacks it. The resolution, which remains same entire year, is always a proposition of policy. The debaters will try to show why ir position is superior to '. The affirmative is responsible for providing a plan to solve for problem(s) identified in resolution. Judges should never stop a debate to question debaters about ir position or issues in resolution. Please use this 6-point rubric to evaluate each competitor in round. The overall score (1-6) should reflect an average of two scores in categories. Please use whole numbers only Category Quality of argumentation Delivery and style major point was well ory and consistently that kept major adequately ory and usually eye contact, voice and a that kept attention of major ory and or but relevance of some was sometimes gestures, that kept Some points were with logic and ory of relevance few and made little eye contact with Lack of support was provided rarely made eye contact and or gestured with Points were not s lacked nonverbal reinforcement 10